HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-05-21 Merit Appeals Board MinutesMERIT BOARD OF APPEALS
Department of Human Resources
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 102
Hilo, Hawai'i
May 21, 2014
CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Merit Appeals Board, County of Hawaii, was called
Item 1): to order at 11:06 a.m. by Chairperson Jubilee N. Kuewa, at the Department of
Human Resources Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 2, Hilo, Hawaii,
on Wednesday, May 21, 2014.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mr. Jubilee N. Kuewa, Chair
Ms. June R. Rabago, Vice -Chair
Mr. David K. S. Nahuina, Member
Absent: Ms. Ida H. Otake, Member
Also Present: Ms. Sharon Toriano, Director, HR Department
Mr. Nicholas Hermes, Deputy Director, HR Department
Ms. Diane Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Ofc. of the Corp. Counsel
Mr. Stewart Maeda, County Clerk, Office of the County Clerk
Ms. Jennifer Jo, Human Resources Technician II, Office of the County Clerk
Ms. Alika Kost, Human Resources Manager II, HR Department
Ms. Jenny Sakamoto, Human Resources Manager II, HR Department
Ms. Gabriella Cabanas, Human Resources Manager II, HR Department
Ms. Teri Spinola-Campbell, Equal Opportunity Officer, HR Department
Ms. Charmaine Kamaka, Human Resources Manager II, HR Department
Ms. Glynis Yamada, Secretary -Reporter, HR Department
ADDENDUM TO The Chair directed the Board to the next order of business, Addendum to
AGENDA Agenda.
Item 2):
(There was none.)
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE PUBLIC Statements from the Public.
Item 3):
(There were none.)
Merit Board of Appeals May 21, 2014
APPROVAL OF The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
MINUTES (Item 4): Approval of Minutes.
(There were none.)
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS Communications.
Item 5):
COMMUNICATION NO. 14-01, RECEIVED ON MAY 9, 2014, APPEALING A
NON -SELECTION TO A POSITION WITHIN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK
Chair Kuewa stated that the purpose today would be to schedule a hearing date
concerning the appeal submitted by the Appellant, Ms. Torres. The Board has
received another communication from Ms. Torres who is requesting that the
Board delay or postpone scheduling her hearing, and asked Mr. Maeda for his
thoughts on the request.
(At this time, Mr. Stewart Maeda (or "Employer"), County Clerk, Office of
the County Clerk, came forward.)
Mr. Maeda replied that they're not opposed to delaying the hearing, but they
would like to schedule it as soon as possible—hopefully, in August.
Ms. Rabago asked for clarification as to whether the letter dated May 16, 2014 is
the document numbered 14-01.1 (SEE ATT. A), which he's referring to or whether
it's the e-mail from Ms. Torres because it does ask for a postponement (SEE
ATT. B).
Chair Kuewa replied that an e-mail was received this morning from Ms. Torres
concerning the scheduling of the hearing (SEE PREY. ATT. B), and asked if the
Members had an opportunity to review it.
Ms. Noda stated that she believes that the Department's position is it's an open
recruitment—open to anyone, anywhere, and any potential applicant in the
nation. The proper avenue to appeal a non -selection for this position is through
the Department's Internal Complaint Procedure, then to the Merit Appeals Board
versus filing a HGEA bargaining unit grievance. If the Department's position was
different, then its attorney, on behalf of the Department would file a motion to
dismiss for lack of Merit Appeals Board jurisdiction.
Page 2
Merit Board of Appeals
May 21, 2014
Ms. Noda further stated that one of the options for the Board to consider would
be for the Department, prior to the actual hearing date, file a motion to dismiss
the appeal because the Merit Appeals Board lacks jurisdiction. If that is the only
motion considered and the Merit Appeals Board dismisses the appeal, the
Appellant or the Department wouldn't need to prepare for the hearing.
Mr. Nahuina stated that the fact that HGEA has decided to go forward with the
grievance that the Merit Appeals Board wouldn't have jurisdiction.
Ms. Rabago agreed and stated that's what she's hearing Ms. Noda say that the
Board would need to formally ask for an opinion before the Board could discuss it
further.
Ms. Noda wondered whether Mr. Maeda's response to the Appellant on the
Step 1 Grievance was included in the exhibit. Ms. Rabago replied that nothing
was provided concerning the grievance, only the response to the internal
complaint procedure from Mr. Maeda and another party.
Ms. Noda believes that Mr. Maeda's response concerning the grievance was that
the proper avenue was their internal complaint procedure, but didn't believe it
was made part of the submissions. Ms. Rabago replied that she received the
April 1, 2014 letter, and it outlined the procedures of the internal complaint
process, but she doesn't see a specific statement saying that it's the correct
process (SEE ATT. C, which is a part of the Appellant's submittal in
Communication No. 14-01).
Ms. Rabago suggested that in spite of Council Chair J Yoshimoto's Step 2 internal
complaint decision (SEE ATT. D, which is a part of the Appellant's submittal in
Communication No. 14-01), that the Board inquire with the Attorney General's
Office for an opinion.
Chair Kuewa asked Ms. Toriano and Mr. Hermes their opinion of what process
Ms. Torres is in now, and what normally would be the next step.
Ms. Toriano replied that she, too, questioned the jurisdiction for the Merit
Appeals Board hearing this appeal. In an open recruitment, our past practice has
been that an employee may file an appeal with the Merit Appeals Board, which
has been entertained by the Board. There is a dual tract of addressing the same
complaint and so it raises the serious question of the jurisdiction.
Ms. Toriano informed the Board that they would be revisiting the internal
complaint procedure. All of the County department's internal complaint
Page 3
Merit Board of Appeals May 21, 2014
procedures would become null and void and they would be operating under a
single County -wide internal complaint procedure.
Mr. Toriano stated that it makes sense to give the employee a choice. In a
situation like this where it's an open recruitment and there are applicants from
outside of the County, the employee would be able to choose which tract they'd
want to pursue—grievance or the Merit Appeals Board.
Mr. Hermes reiterated Ms. Toriano's point that, in the past, their department has
advised that the distinguishing factor depends upon what the recruitment vehicle
is. In looking at the collective bargaining agreements, the controlling or related
language is "promotions." In this case, the County Clerk's office elected to
conduct an open recruitment worldwide. In the past opinions of previous
Administrations, it was felt that the most appropriate appeal venue would be the
internal complaint procedure culminating in an appeal with the Merit Appeals
Board.
Mr. Hermes stated that the reason for that was the concept of "recruitment and
examination," which is the subject matter under the jurisdiction of the Merit
Appeals Board. It was a little more generic and global to the issue of a non -
selection when competing against people from all over—not just within our
particular jurisdictional civil service system. Conversely, if this was an internal
promotion within the County Clerk's office, more than likely our answer would
have been different and more aligned with the grievance procedure. In the
scheme of things, it seemed to make sense as they try to decipher cases day-to-
day—but, it's a matter of opinion.
Ms. Noda said she thinks part of the confusion is that the Appellant refers to it as
a "promotion," so that would put it within the collective bargaining agreement.
She concurred with Mr. Hermes because if there was an applicant for this same
position, say, from Florida, that applicant would have the same opportunity to
appeal their non -selection, thus everyone in that applicant pool should be using
the same vehicle to appeal.
Ms. Rabago stated that she somewhat agreed and disagreed. The Merit Appeals
Board is here for recruitment, whether internal or external. If they're questioning
their qualifications and they're deemed ineligible, they can come to the Board, or
if for any reason they think that everything wasn't considered that should have
been considered, they can come to the Board. But, if they're applying for a
position, which in this case is a promotion from a Clerk I to a Clerk II position,
people from the outside could come here as this would be the proper procedure
for them because they're not civil service employees. But, for this particular
person, Ms. Torres, the proper path to follow is the grievance procedure.
Page 4
Merit Board of Appeals May 21, 2014
Ms. Rabago said that she strongly believes there are certain things that a civil
service employee can appear before this Board and certain things that the proper
path would be the grievance procedure.
Chair Kuewa stated that based on what he's heard this was an open
announcement open to the public as well as to the current employees. The
process for challenging a decision by the individual depends upon the status of
the person filing an objection or a complaint. So, for current civil service
employees, under this announcement, have this process. Does a non -civil service
employee have a different process? Was it a rule, policy, or regulation rather
than just a practice?
Ms. Toriano replied that the current internal complaint procedure is silent in
distinguishing a civil servant from a non -civil servant. If you go back to what is the
deciding factor to access the Merit Appeals Board, it has to do with how the
position was announced and recruited for, and not the status of the applicant.
Chair Kuewa commented this was announced to the public and anyone who filed
an objection, such as this appellant, would go through the internal complaint
procedure and, ultimately, to the Merit Appeals Board. It appears that the Merit
Appeals Board has jurisdiction once the individual finishes the internal complaint
procedures.
Ms. Toriano replied that they may access the Merit Appeals Board because our
procedures are silent, and it doesn't disallow it.
Ms. Noda stated that they're aware that the Appellant had filed in both tracks.
Process -wise, the Appellant may have input or an opinion. She would possibly
represent the department (Office of the County Clerk), if the jurisdiction issue is
contested and argued. Probably someone from the Office of the Corporation
Counsel would be giving a legal opinion and as part of the contested case for the
appellant, an attorney from the Attorney General's Office would represent this
Board.
Ms. Rabago inquired if this Board hears this case and makes a decision and the
grievance goes forward and a decision is made—and are different—what would
be the decision.
Ms. Noda replied that if there isn't a motion to dismiss for lack of Merit Appeals
Board jurisdiction, there would be a motion in the grievance tract for lack of
arbitrability because that would not be the proper venue. Ms. Rabago
commented that the arbitrator could rule either way.
Page 5
Merit Board of Appeals
May 21, 2014
Chair Kuewa stated that the Appellant has already gone through the internal
complaint process. In her e-mail, which is Communication No. 14-01.2, she also
has a grievance hearing as well as EEOC for mediation (SEE ATT. E). So, she's
going through three channels. He asked whether this was allowed or prohibited.
Is there a provision that prohibits someone from doing multiple or simultaneous
channels on the same issue? If an employee is allowed to go through multiple
processes simultaneously, does this Board have the authority to dismiss their
using the Merit Appeals Board process.
Ms. Noda replied that that's the motion to dismiss in one, two, or three of the
venues. According to the Appellant's e-mail, her grievance step is at the
preliminary stage of Step I, whereas, before this body it's at the final unless
there's an appeal to circuit court and the decision.
Mr. Nahuina stated that when this position was posted, it wasn't posted as a
promotion worldwide. It was posted as a vacant position. The Appellant was
applying for it—not as a promotion, but as a person qualified for the vacant
position, although it is a promotion for her because it's not a lateral change.
Mr. Nahuina further stated that the Appellant applied for an open position, but at
the same time, is trying to fall back on her time spent and experience within the
system, and claiming that it's a promotion. She's using the union, Merit Appeals
Board, and the grievance procedures. She needs to decide what her real issue
is—she doesn't have union representation, therefore, should she come to the
Merit Appeals Board?
Chair Kuewa commented on the "promotion" term. He considers the Appellant
an applicant, like all of the others who applied. If she's selected, the nature of the
action would be a promotion, but until she's actually selected and promoted—
this is not a promotion action. It's an application.
Ms. Rabago stated that the Appellant applied for a position, she qualified, and she
was a candidate for the position. Whether or not 100 people applied from the
outside, they were all candidates for the position. For this particular person, this
was a promotional opportunity from a Clerk I to a Clerk II.
Ms. Rabago directed the Board to its Rule 104-3(a) which states, "The Board shall
not act on an appeal but shall defer to other authority if the action complained of
constitutes a prohibited act that is subject to the jurisdiction of another appellate
body or administrative agency or the grievance procedure under a collective
bargaining agreement." The Appellant is a bargaining unit member. The position
Page 6
Merit Board of Appeals
May 21, 2014
itself is Bargaining Unit 03, under HGEA. For her it was a promotional opportunity
and she should be filing a grievance.
Ms. Rabago understands that the Department of Human Resources has allowed
multiple paths. She could agree if they said the Appellant didn't qualify on the
application or her 10 years of service didn't meet the minimum qualifications.
Ms. Noda commented that out of a pool of applications, what would be fair—
whether one or some of them have the option to do one path and the others do
not.
Ms. Rabago stated as far as she's concerned the Appellant can avail herself to the
grievance process. If in this grievance process, the person from Florida is out, it's
up to them to decide what they want to do—and they may come before this
Board. But, we're talking about a bargaining unit member who has this right and
this path. And that's the path she should be taking.
Ms. Noda stated it's up to the Board if they would like to make a decision now or
obtain input from one or both parties regarding the jurisdiction issue.
Mr. Hermes stated that in situations where whether it's an external or internal
application process, employees are applying from multiple, different bargaining
units and backgrounds. The Merit Appeals Board and the internal complaint
procedure is a more global and inclusive process where many
applicants/complainants may have a voice and due process. The advice that
they've given in the past is in the interest of everyone having the same place to
show up and speak, if they need to on their own behalf. If they were to advise
the opposite, in the case where there was multiple bargaining units, it would be a
little problematic for them to administer, notwithstanding that there may be
multiple grievances and grievance tracts from different bargaining units, but our
predecessors may have found this to be the most inclusive.
Chair Kuewa agreed with Mr. Hermes and what he's heard, however, he wasn't
comfortable on making any decision because it's unclear what the jurisdiction
issues or boundaries are. He feels that the Board should be provided an advisory
by counsel who would be assigned to handle this appeal hearing.
Ms. Noda clarified that the Board is not requesting that both parties have the
opportunity to make a submittal on the jurisdiction issue, but would like the
Board's counsel to do the legal research and to issue a legal opinion. Chair Kuewa
replied in the affirmative. Ms. Noda informed the Board that the Board's counsel
would be Mr. Julian White for appeal matters. Ms. Noda further stated that this
Page 7
Merit Board of Appeals May 21, 2014
matter would be calendared for the next meeting in June, under "Unfinished
Business" as well as possible scheduling.
Motion: Chair Kuewa moved that the Board defer scheduling the hearing and other
matters related to the Appellant, until the Board receives an opinion from their
counsel concerning the Merit Appeals Board's jurisdiction to hear this case.
Seconded by Ms. Rabago.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Nahuina, Rabago, and
Chair Kuewa — 3.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Board Member Otake —1.
EXCUSED: None.
Chair Kuewa informed the Board that based on this motion, the other two
matters concerning the scheduling and the recusal of the recorder (Board
Secretary) would be deferred as well to the Board's June meeting.
NEW BUSINESS The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business, New
Item 6): Business.
(There was none.)
UNFINISHED BUSINESSThe Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
Item 7): Unfinished Business.
COMMUNICATION NO. 13-02, RECEIVED ON AUGUST 1, 2013, FROM JAY ISHIBASHI,
HGEA MCEC AGENT, APPEALING AN INVOLUNTARY TRANSFER TO ANOTHER
POSITION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS (Deferred: August 21,
2013• September 18 2013• and March 19 2014)
Ms. Noda stated that the County would be filing a motion to dismiss but has not
done so, yet. If a motion is not filed in June or July, she would like to request that
his appeal be scheduled in August for a motion or a status update. Presently,
their office caseload is heavy and they are in transition.
Page 8
Merit Board of Appeals May 21, 2014
Motion: Ms. Rabago moved to defer Communication Number 13-02 to August.
Seconded by Mr. Nahuina.
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES: Board Members Nahuina, Rabago,
and Chair Kuewa — 3.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Board Member Otake —1.
EXCUSED: None.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business,
Item 8): Director's Report.
Ms. Toriano stated that this is the time of year where they're leveling out with
negotiations with HGEA Units 02, 03, and 04. In addition, the State Legislature
passed a bill that established Bargaining Unit 14, which is primarily for their
Water Safety Officers and for the State law enforcement job classes. According to
the bill, it's supposed to come up on July 1 of this year, and they would probably
need a little more time to get a collective bargaining agreement for Unit 14.
Ms. Toriano informed the Board that she would like to take this opportunity to
introduce their Human Resources Division Heads, so that they would be
somewhat familiar with the staff and all of the great things they do for the
department.
(At this time, Ms. Alika Kost, Human Resources Manager II, came forward.)
Ms. Kost stated that she is a part of Personnel/Organizational Development, and
takes care of coordinating, conducting, and organizing training for the County.
She works directly with other departments to meet their training needs, as well as
facilitate conflict resolution.
(At this time, Ms. Jenny Sakamoto, Human Resources Manager II, came
forward.)
Ms. Sakamoto stated that she is responsible for Classification and Pay, which
covers job classes, re -organizations, and reallocations. They assist departments
with their organizational structure as well as assist them in maintaining their
classes and advisory roles.
Page 9
Merit Board of Appeals
May 21, 2014
(At this time, Ms. Gabriella Cabanas, Human Resources Manager II, came
forward.)
Ms. Cabanas stated that she oversees the recruitment and examination division,
and they're responsible for all of the open -competitive and internal recruitments.
They have a lot of public contact with both applicants and employees, and
encourages everyone to apply for County of Hawaii jobs. They attend job fairs
throughout the island and do recruitment talks at the University of Hawaii,
Hawaii Community College, as well as other community organizations on an as
needed basis, such as the Department of Education and Veterans groups. They
do County -wide job placements of their medically injured employees who cannot
return to their usual and customary jobs in the County. They also advise the
County's 21 departments on how to fill their vacancies and provide general
guidance, as needed, regarding job placement and related issues.
(At this time, Ms. Teri Spinola-Campbell, Equal Opportunity Officer (and
Americans with Disability Coordinator), came forward.)
Ms. Spinola-Campbell stated that she's not restricted to the Department of
Human Resources. Under the ADA, she takes complaints from the public
concerning their County's services, programs, and facilities. She develops
policies, procedures, and does training for the County's employees as well as train
people in the community, answers questions, and disseminates information.
Also, concerning Title VI, she sometimes does complaint reviews for non-
discrimination, and for recipients of federal assistance she assists departments
with language access under Hawaii's language access law and investigates
complaints. She's sometimes involved in conflict resolution.
(At this time, Ms. Charmaine Kamaka, Human Resources Manager II, came
forward.)
Ms. Kamaka stated that they're responsible for the County's Employee Health and
Safety programs, and works with departments to create a safe and healthy
workplace for their employees island -wide. They're an in-house resource in
helping the departments comply with occupational safety and health standards.
For example, they'll call and ask what a rule is about. They'll look up the
standards and give them options on how they could comply with that standard in
the simplest way and in the most cost-effective manner. Employees can call with
safety complaints and they'll address those. If there's an occupational safety and
health inspection, they would go and defend the honor of the departments. They
also conduct in-house training to comply with safety standards. The other side of
their function is to manage the County's self-insured workers compensation
program. Tax dollars are spent judiciously because it's not their money and they
Page 10
Merit Board of Appeals May 21, 2014
need to take care of their injured workers. They need to determine that the
injury did, in fact, occur and whether or not it would rise to the level of an
industrial injury—from its inception to its resolution.
At this time, Chair Kuewa and Board Members thanked everyone.
Ms. Toriano stated that it's important that the Board is aware that the division
heads are actively involved in defining how their performance is measured. As
problems or issues arise, they're readily available to nip it in the butt by
monitoring it on an ongoing basis.
Chair Kuewa inquired whether Nick is in charge of labor relations.
Ms. Toriano replied that she asked Nick to be patient. They had a very serious
concern with the security and safety of our employees which required immediate
assistance from the Department of Information Technology. In order to do so,
they had to take the money from somewhere and, consequently, the lag in the
hiring for the position. Ironically, the Department of Information Technology was
able to provide a worker to assist us. They have since advertised and announced
the vacancy for the labor position. It hasn't closed yet, and hopes to have a
person sometime in July.
Chair Kuewa thanked Mr. Hermes for wearing two hats.
Mr. Nahuina inquired about the cover letter concerning the Director of Human
Resources evaluation as well as the status of its distribution.
Ms. Toriano replied that Chair Kuewa signed the letter and it's been distributed.
The deadline for the departments to respond is May 28.
Ms. Noda mentioned that some questions concerning the annual evaluation sent
to department heads and deputies have been brought to her attention by
Ms. Yamada. There were several questions whether the department head could
or should be distributing the evaluation within their department in order for
other people to provide the Board with feedback. This is something to consider
for next year that, perhaps, the instructions or cover letter may want to address
that.
Chair Kuewa commented that it's always useful to receive input from the people
within the organization, but it's a matter of whether the response or input comes
to the Board from just the director or everyone from within the organization. For
discussion purposes, he preferred that they do an informal survey within their
own department and that the director provide a summary of it.
Page 11
Merit Board of Appeals May 21, 2014
At this time, Chair Kuewa clarified for the Board that Item Number 5
(Communication 14-01) concerning the Appellant, Ms. Torres, that the Board
Secretary will issue sufficient notice to her of the Board's decision today. The
Board's attorney will follow-up and determine whether the Attorney General or
Corporation Counsel provide an opinion with regards to the jurisdictional issue
concerning hearing her case by this Board, and that a written legal opinion would
be submitted to this Board prior to its meeting in June.
SCHEDULE NEXT The Chair directed the Board to proceed to the next order of business, Schedule
MEETING DATE Next Meeting Date.
Item 9):
Chair Kuewa announced that their next regularly scheduled meeting would be held
on Wednesday, June 25, 11 a.m., at the Human Resources Conference Room.
ADJOURNMENT There being no other business, at 12:03 a.m., Ms. Rabago moved to adjourn the
Item 10): meeting. Seconded by Mr. Nahuina and carried by the following vote
The voice vote, was as follows:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
EXCUSED:
APPROVED:
ftubilee N. Kuewa
Chair
Board Members Nahuina, Rabago,
and Chair Kuewa — 3.
None.
Board Member Otake - 1.
None.
Respectfully submitted,
Glyni Yamada
Secretary
ST/gy Page 12
COUNTY -OF HAWA11
f'11` f i`E'E')1_!"'IC,IS
2DI4 IE:rky 19 AM 8:27
May 16, 2014
Jubilee N. Kuewa, Chair
County of Hawaii
Merit Appeals Board
3100 Ainaola Drive
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
RE: CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Dear Mr. Kuewa:
My name is Doreen "Dee" Torres and my case is scheduled to be discussed at your May 21, 2014
meeting. At this time, I am requesting that Glynis Yamada, Secretary of the County of Hawaii
Merit Appeals Board, recuse herself, due to a conflict of interest. She was my former supervisor in
the County Clerk's Office, in Council Services.
In 2011, while being TA'd (temporarily assigned) to the Council Services Assistant II (SR -17)
position, she gave me a negative JPR (job Performance Appraisal Report) after my probationary
period, but yet continued to allow me to TA for an additional year -and -a -half, and also failed to give
me an official final JPR.
I feel that this negative JPR was the result of her insufficient training and destructive Temporary
Assignment; also, by not providing the proper work tools (supplies and equipment), such as the
"Share Drive" necessary to create the Council Agenda (in violation of HGEA BU 03 Article 17D
Personal Rights). I have records to show that this caused me to work three hours overtime while I
attempted to prepare my first Council Agenda on January 11, 2011.
This was discovered a few months following my JPR, when I noticed other Council Services and
Committee Services staff sharing this drive while making their agendas, as it contained vital
information needed to complete the task. She also often instigated dissent amongst us, and I also
felt that she was constantly setting me up for failure.
Thank you in advance. And I would appreciate your consideration to my request to postpone this
meeting to appoint an interim secretary, as I feel that her influence and/or input may affect the Merit
Appeals Board's decision regarding my complaint. Please email me at dtorresrr)co.hawaii.hi.us or
call me at 961-8256 or 938-9101, if you should need further details pertaining to this request.
Sincerest Aloha,
oreen "Dee" M. Torres
Council Services Assistant I (SR -14)
Office of the County Clerk
MERIT BOARD OF APPEALS
COUNTY OF HAWAII
cc: Maile Etherton, Union Agent, Hawaii Government Employees AssociationcoM. NO. 14-01.1
Nicholas Hermes, Deputy Director, Human Resources Department DATE P/May 21, 2014
Yamada, Glynis
From: Hermes, Nicholas
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 7:56 AM
To: Yamada, Glynis
Subject: FW: MAB Request
Attachments: MAB Recuse.pdf
From: Torres, Dee
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 9:37 AM
To: jkuewa@hawaii.edu
Cc: metherton(ftgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: MAB Request
Good Morning Mr. Kuewa,
My name is Dee Torres of the Office of the County Clerk. Please see attached letter of request for the
upcoming Merit Appeals Board Meeting on Wednesday, May 21, 2014. Please email or call me at 961-8256 or
938-9101 regarding the status of this matter, or if you should need further details regarding this request. Have a
nice day!
Mahalo & Aloha,
Dee Torres
Council Services Assistant I
Office of the County Clerk
Jube Kuewa
From:
Dee Torres [dtorres@co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent:
Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:31 AM
To:
Jube Kuewa
Cc:
metherton@hgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject:
RE: Request to Postpone Hearing
Yes. Mr. Kuewa, as the Merit Board's decision is binding & final, I would appreciate it very much if you would
postpone scheduling my hearing, pending the results of my other ongoing cases. I will notify you when to
proceed with the scheduling of my case. Thank you very much in advance for your consideration regarding my
request. Have a nice day.
Aloha for now, Dee 'Torres
From: Jube Kuewa [mailto•ikuewa@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:20 AM
To: Torres, Dee
Subject: FW: Request to Postpone Hearing
Ms. Torres, thank you for sharing your update. For clarification purposes, are you asking the Merit Appeals Board to
postpone its scheduling of your appeal hearing until you notify us that you are ready for the hearing and when you will
be available?
Jube Kuewa
From: Dee Torres[mailto•dtorres@co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:12 AM
To: Jube Kuewa
Cc: metherton@hgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: Request to Postpone Hearing
Hi Mr. Kuewa,
Thanks for your response. Sorry, [ won't be at the meeting today, as I have multiple deadlines to meet today.
Please discuss my request as it is very vital that Glynis Yamada not influence any decision that the board may
make regarding my case.
FYI, HGEA has decided to proceed with my Grievance—Step I is scheduled for this Friday, citing recruitment
& testing violations. I personally believe that Glynis wants to rush my case forward before these violations are
investigated.
It may behoove the Merit Board to postpone my case, as the results of my Grievance regarding recruitment &
testing violations may prove relevant to this Board; also, FYI the status of my EEOC complaint is in the
mediation phase.
Sincerest Aloha,
Dee Torres
From: Jube Kuewa [mailto_jkuewa(a)hawaii.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 9:54 AM
To: Torres, Dee
Subject:
1
Yes, Ms. Torres, the Board meeting will take place today as planned. The agenda will include scheduling a hearing date
for your appeal and to also discuss your request.
Jube Kuewa
From: Dee Torres [mailto:dtorres co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 7:42 AM
To: Jube Kuewa
Cc: metherton@hgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: RE: MAB Request
Importance: High
Good Morning Mr. Kuewa,
Could you please inform me of the status of my request, as the Merit Appeals Board Meeting to schedule my
hearing is today at 11 a.m. To date, I have not received a notice of postponement of today's meeting.
Mahalo & Aloha,
Dee Torres
Council Services Assistant I
Office of the County Clerk
From: Jube Kuewa [mailto Jkuewa@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 10:56 AM
To: Torres, Dee
Cc: metherton@hgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: RE: MAB Request
Ms. Torres, I received your request today and am looking into the matter at this time. Thank you.
Jube Kuewa
From: Torres, Dee[mailto:dtorres@co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 9:37 AM
To: Jube Kuewa
Cc: metherton@hyea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: MAB Request
Good Morning Mr. Kuewa,
My name is Dee Torres of the Office of the County Clerk. Please see attached letter of request for the
upcoming Merit Appeals Board Meeting on Wednesday, May 21, 2014. Please email or call me at 961-8256 or
938-9101 regarding the status of this matter, or if you should need further details regarding this request. Have a
nice day!
Mahalo & Aloha,
Dee Torres
Council Services Assistant I
Office of the County Clerk
April 1, 2014
J Yoshimoto
Council Chair & Presiding Officer
Hawaii County Council
25 Aupuni Street, Suite 1402
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Dear Chair Yoshimoto:
Pursuant to the Internal Complaint Procedure's, Office of the County Clerk, I am requesting a
Step 2 meeting with you, as I am appealing the Step I decision from Stewart Maeda, County
Clerk (attached), regarding my non -selection for the recruitment of the Council Services
Assistant II (SR -17) position. The County Clerk's decision just based on the interview scores
does not justify my non -promotion. At this point in time, I am still questioning the validity of
the scoring.
Consideration of other criteria or factors are necessary to select or promote within the Civil
Service Merit System, as my eleven (11) years of successful and dedicated service has indicated.
I am also questioning the selection of the interview panel.
I would appreciate a response within seven (7) working days, as stipulated in the complaint
procedures for a meeting date and time. I can be reached at 961-8256 or by cell 938-9101.
Sincerely,
�J w
Doreen "Dee" M. Torres
Council Services Assistant I (SR -14)
Office of the County Clerk
Cc: Maile Etherton, Union Agent, Hawaii Government Employees Association
Jennifer Jo, Human Resources Technician II, Office of the County Clerk
Enclosures
J YOSHIMOTO
Chair & Presiding Office
Council District 2
Email.jyoshimoto@co.hawaii.hi.us
Via Hand Delivery
April 11, 2014
HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL
County of Hawaii
Hawai'i County Building
25 Aupuni Street, Suite 1402
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Ms. Doreen Torres, Council Services Assistant I
Office of the County Clerk
25 Aupuni Street, Suite 1402
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Subject: Internal Complaint — Step 2 Decision
Dear Ms. Torres:
Phone: (808) 961-8272
Fax: (808) 961-8912
This letter acknowledges our Internal Complaint Step 2 meeting on April 3, 2014, to discuss your non -
selection for the Council Services Assistant II position. Also present at the meeting were Union Agent
Maile Etherton and Council Vice -Chair Karen Eoff.
This meeting was scheduled as part of the internal complaint process. You previously met with County
Clerk Stewart Maeda in Step 1 on March 27, 2014. I have reviewed the interview instrument and the
selection process used by the Clerk's office. Based on our meeting and the review of the documents in
this case, I will not be overturning the Step 1 decision made by County Clerk, Mr. Maeda.
If you do not agree with this decision, you may appeal this decision to the Merit Appeals Board in
accordance with section 104-1 of the Rules of the Civil Service Commission.
Sincerely,
TYoshim�oto
County Council Chair
cc: Stewart Maeda, Hawaii County Clerk
Karen Eoff, County Council Vice -Chair
Maile Etherton, HGEA Union Agent
Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
Jube Kuewa c:nlu ,<<F l• Fig Il
_q
From: Dee Torres [dtorres@co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:31 AM ,� x, 03
To: Jube Kuewa
Cc: metherton@hgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: RE: Request to Postpone Hearing
Yes, Mr. Kuewa, as the Merit Board's decision is binding & final, I would appreciate it very much if you would
postpone scheduling my hearing, pending the results of my other ongoing cases. I will notify you when to
proceed with the scheduling of my case. Thank you very much in advance for your consideration regarding my
request. Have a nice day.
Aloha for now, Dee Torres
From: Jube Kuewa [mailto:jkuewa@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:20 AM
To: Torres, Dee
Subject: FW: Request to Postpone Hearing
Ms. Torres, thank you for sharing your update. For clarification purposes, are you asking the Merit Appeals Board to
postpone its scheduling of your appeal hearing until you notify us that you are ready for the hearing and when you will
be available?
Jube Kuewa
From: Dee Torres[mailto:dtorres@co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:12 AM
To: Jube Kuewa
Cc: metherton@hgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: Request to Postpone Hearing
Hi Mr. Kuewa,
Thanks for your response. Sony, I won't be at the meeting today, as I have multiple deadlines to meet today.
Please discuss my request as it is very vital that Glynis Yamada not influence any decision that the board may
make regarding my case.
FYI, HGEA has decided to proceed with my Grievance—Step 1 is scheduled for this Friday, citing recruitment
& testing violations. I personally believe that Glynis wants to rush my case forward before these violations are
investigated.
It may behoove the Merit Board to postpone my case, as the results of my Grievance regarding recruitment &
testing violations may prove relevant to this Board; also, FYI the status of my EEOC complaint is in the
mediation phase.
Sincerest Aloha,
Dee Torres
From: Jube Kuewa [mailto:jkuewa@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 9:54 AM
To: Torres, Dee
Subject:
MERIT BOARD OF APPEALS
COUNTY OF HAWAII
COM. NO. 14-01.2
DATE P/May 21, 2014
Yes, Ms. Torres, the Board meeting will take place today as planned. The agenda will include scheduling a hearing date
for your appeal and to also discuss your request.
Jube Kuewa
From: Dee Torres[mailto:dtorres@co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 7:42 AM
To: Jube Kuewa
Cc: metherton(ahgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: RE: MAB Request
Importance: High
Good Morning Mr. Kuewa,
Could you please inform me of the status of my request, as the Merit Appeals Board Meeting to schedule my
hearing is today at 11 a.m. To date, I have not received a notice of postponement of today's meeting.
Mahalo & Aloha,
Dee Torres
Council. Services Assistant I
Office of the County Clerk
From: Jube Kuewa [mailto:ikuewaahawaii.edu]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 10:56 AM
To: Torres, Dee
Cc: methertonahgea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: RE: MAB Request
Ms. Torres, I received your request today and am looking into the matter at this time. Thank you.
Jube Kuewa
From: Torres, Dee[mailto:dtorres@co.hawaii.hi.us]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 9:37 AM
To: Jube Kuewa
Cc: metherton@)hyea.org; Hermes, Nicholas
Subject: MAB Request
Good Morning Mr. Kuewa,
My name is Dee Torres of the Office of the County Clerk. Please see attached letter of request for the
upcoming Merit Appeals Board Meeting on Wednesday, May 21, 2014. Please email or call me at 961-8256 or
938-9101 regarding the status of this matter, or if you should need further details regarding this request. Have a
nice day!
Mahalo & Aloha,
Dee Torres
Council Services Assistant I
Office of the County Clerk
2